Applicability of PAN Requirement for Foreign National
Ministry has issued a circular dated 10th June, 2014 clarifying that foreign nationals, who are subscribers/promoters of a company are not required to furnish their PAN details, in case they are not allotted a PAN. They may provide a declaration instead in the prescribed proforma.
The corresponding notifications and circulars are available on the Ministry’s website at www.mca.gov.in.
Ministry of Corporate Affairs
13-June-2014 13:00 IST
Sale of Malba (Scrap) on demolition of structure thereon is a Capital Gain and not income from other sources, held by High court of P. & H. in the case of CIT, Jalandhar V. Ribu Saggi. The 'a' sold land and malba after demolition of structure. AO treated sale of malba as income from other sources. It was held by HC that there was extinguishment of right of the assessee, in superstructure leading to transfer of the super structure, within the meaning of Sec. 2(47). Capital gain was to be computed by deducting indexed cost of structure from sale value of malba. In the same case capital gain on sale of land was computed by under estimating Fair market value of land as on 1.4.1981 at Rs. 21000/- per Marla only, by AO, Tribunal directed to take FMV at Rs. 125000/- per Marla, after considering valuation by DVO and valuation got done by 'a'. HC held that valuation of land is question of fact based on material on record and there arise no question of law. Hence upheld the order of Tribunal to value FMV as on 1.4.81 at Rs. 125000/- per Marla. [2014] 45
taxmann.com 371
CA. Vinay Mittal, Ghaziabad
SECTION 7 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 - INCORPORATION OF COMPANY - APPLICABILITY OF PAN REQUIREMENT FOR FOREIGN NATIONALS
GENERAL CIRCULAR NO.16/2014[F.NO.01/12/2013 CL-V], 2014- 06 -10
In continuation of the General Circular No. 12/2014 dated 22.05.2014 regarding the above subject, it is clarified that the provisions of the said Circular are applicable to a Foreign National who is a subscriber/promoter at the time of incorporation of the Company.
2. In case the said subscriber/promoter, does not possess Permanent Account Number (PAN), he/she shall furnish a declaration in the prescribed proforma, as an attachment to the Incorporation Form (INC-7).
3. Further, it is clarified that, in case of a Resident Director of the proposed company he/she shall be required to submit PAN details at the time of incorporation.
4. This issue with the approval of the Competent Authority.
Undertaking
I. . . . . . . . . . . . . (name) . . . . . . . . . . . . ., son of . . . . . . . . . . . . . (father's name) . . . . . . . . . . . ., citizen of . . . . . . . . . . . . . (nationality) R/o (Address) . . . . . . . . . . . . . having passport No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (passport Number) . . . . . . . . . . . . . hereby declare as under:
(i) That I am not required to obtain Income Tax Permanent Account Number (PAN) under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961;
(ii) That in view of the above I have not been issued any PAN; and
(iii) That I undertake to furnish to the Registrar of Companies (mention jurisdiction) details of my PAN as soon as a Permanent Account Number is allotted to me.
Date:
Place: (Signature)
Name of the Person
■■
FYI - Please find updates in the ITR form of Financial year 2013-14 (AY 14-15) as under:
1. There are no refund by Cheque and only e-refund will be allowed
2. Claim of TDS/TCS credit of earlier years - Hence if we don't have sufficient income we can carry forward the credit benefit.
3. CIN/LLPIN in ITR has to be filled by Company/LLP
4. Buy back of shares must be reported in the ITR by CHC
5. PAN of Debtors has to be provided if the assessee is claimed Bad debts
6. In Capital gain Computation
- Details U/s. 50 C is required to be reported
- Sale of securities by FII's
7. Gains U/s. 43CA under PGBP
8. Special income tax Return has to be shown separately
9. Payment details to Non-residents required to be reported in ITR
10. Changes in ITR5/7
- ITR 5 includes Private discretionary trust
- In ITR 7 following details has to be reported:
a. Registration No. & Registration Authority
b. Accumulation of Income details
c. Voluntary contribution like whether from foreign or anonymous
11. Additional details U/s. 36/37
12. Transactions with Cyprus has to be reported if any.
Now in the Income tax return form it will be necessary to show Property's
guideline value and transaction value separately U/s 50C
Now builders and colonizers will also have to show amount of difference in
property sold by them at less than guideline value U/s 43CA
Earlier State Govt. Undertakings used to save tax by making payment of
royalty, fees, charges, licence fee to its own State Government, now U/s
40(a) (iib) they are not allowed any deduction of such expenses, thereofre
in the ITR FORMS such payments will have to be sepaprately shown for
disallowance.
Now credit of unused TDS can be carried forward and brought forward if
the corresponding income is not taxable in the current year.
Now charitable and religious trust will have to give break up of corpus and
non corpus donation from local and foreign nations.
In case of bad debts exceeding 1 Lakh PAN No. will have to be given.
Payments to Non Residents will have to be shown separately by way of Royalty, Commission, Interest, Fees etc. So that it will be checked that Withholding tax U/s 195 has been deducted or not ?
Cost Inflation Index for calculation of Capital Gains for FY 2014-15 is 1024. Notification 31/2014 [F No 142/3/2014-TPL] of 11-6-2014.
The Maharashtra BUDGET for 2014-2015 is announced today 5th June, 2014 and the main tax proposals in respect of Maharashtra VAT and Profession Tax are -
Registration limit increased to 10 lakhs
VAT Audit limit raised to 1 crore from FY 2013-2014
Late Fee reduced to Rs.2,000/- for late upto 1 month in filing Return
Pending Returns can be filed with Tax, interest and Late Fee of Rs.1,000/-.
Retailer composition @1% of total turnover or @1.5% of taxable turnover
No 30(4) penal interest if additional demand as audit or investigation is less than 10% of tax paid with returns.
Rate of Tax on Cotton reduced to 2%
Profession Tax limit for salaried persons increased to Rs.7,500/-
Companies Act Needs Comprehensive Review: CII President Jun 04, 2014 | |
| CII has called for a comprehensive review of the Companies Act 2013 and Companies Rules, 2014 issued thereunder. "Due to the hurried pace in which the Companies Act, 2013 and the Companies Rules, 2014 were implemented, the industry barely got an opportunity to absorb and understand the provisions or their impact in their entirety. Many new concepts are being introduced in the legislation for the first time, and practices with respect to these need to be allowed to evolve over time. However, the rush to notify the Act has introduced disruptive features making it harder for corporates to ensure compliance", said Mr Ajay Shriram, President, CII, referring to the fact that the final set of Rules were released in the last week of March 2014 to be implemented from April 1, 2014.
Mr Shriram further added that "the Government needs to trust Industry. One or two incidence of corporate malfeasance should not lead to mistrust of the entire spectrum of corporate India and should not make normal business activities difficult. While the country is looking to improve its image after a series of setbacks like retrospective changes to tax laws, poor economic conditions, etc, an unclear and cumbersome Companies Act would make things worse. India already ranks very low in terms of ease of doing business and the new act will further add to the cost and complications of doing business".
In absence of any unambiguous clarifications from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, companies are resorting to different interpretations of the provisions. There is no uniform interpretation of even items of ordinary business such as appointment of Independent Directors. CII has made detailed representation to the Government on the subject. Some of the key issues highlighted include:
One, clarity is required vis-à-vis transitional provisions. For example, while the Act provides transitional period of one year for the appointment of independent directors, constitution of Audit Committee and Nomination & Remuneration Committees is mandatory with effect from 1 April 2014. The two requirements need to be aligned.
Two, Directors of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee are expected to prescribe the criteria for evaluation of all directors; carry out evaluation of every director's performance and recommend the appointment and removal of directors. It is also required to lay down remuneration policies. Provisions such as this could make board's functioning difficult resulting in break-down of trust and too much caution. The Act should lay down specific and objective parameters in this regard.
Three, provisions pertaining to Related Party Transactions indirectly seeks to vest power in minority in most of cases which is against the fundamental principle of shareholders' democracy and majority rule. Legislation should balance interests of multiple stakeholders and equity must apply to both big and small shareholders to avoid misuse of the provisions by any class – majority or minority Further, the compliance requirement to obtain prior approval of audit committee for all related party transactions is too onerous and may result in Audit Committees not being able to give due focus to key items. .
Further, transactions between a holding company and its 100% subsidiary does not compromise interests of any stakeholders. However, it still has to comply with all procedural requirements as transactions with other parties.
Four, a careful review of the mandate of the Audit Committee is also required. It is for the auditors to monitor and confirm the effectiveness of the systems, processes and controls to the Audit Committee. A reverse obligation on the Audit Committee is clearly unwarranted. Requiring the Audit Committee to evaluate risk management system is also unreasonable.
Five, corporates should be allowed adequate legroom to comply with the CSR provision in a self-responsible manner. Incidental and supplementary activities even if related to Company's business should be allowed as CSR so long as they fall in the activities specified in schedule VII. Onerous provisions would hold back innovation, defeat legislative intent and shift the focus from 'comply with conscience' to 'tick-box compliance.' Government had in fact assured that it will authorize the Boards to choose the scope of CSR activities as it deems fit – this power has not been given in the Act as of now.
Six, private companies which are neither subsidiaries of listed companies nor have substantial borrowings from banks or financial institutions should be exempted from certain provisions of the Act. Such companies should not be treated at par with other public interest entities.
Seven, applicability of the requirement of rotation of auditors for companies other than listed companies is also prescribed under the Act. CII strongly suggests that private companies and public companies which do not have substantial public funding be exempted from this requirement.
In addition to the above, there are several inconsistencies between the Act and Rules and at times within the Act itself. CII has highlighted these anomalies in its detailed representation.
CII has all along underscored the need for ensuring that the new law aims at progression and development of business instead of impeding it. Law needs to contemplate and weigh up the interests not just of stakeholders but also take forward the business objects of the corporates. At a time when the situation warrants decentralisation of decision making to lower levels, the new act is proposing more centralization at Board levels.
CII hopes that the new government would take into consideration the difficulties being faced by corporates and take corrective steps in consultation with all | |
 | |
| Date: Jun 03, 2014 | |
| Liberalised Remittance Scheme (LRS) for resident individuals-Increase in the limit from USD 75,000 to USD 125,000 | |
|
Assessee cannot be denied credit for TDS on the ground of Form 26AS mismatch because he is not at fault. Non-grant of TDS credit causes harassment, inconvenience & makes the assessee feel cheated. Dept to pay interest + costs of Rs. 25,000
The assessee filed a return in which he claimed a refund of Rs. 2.32 lakhs on account of excess TDS by the Government department. The return was processed by the Central Processing Centre (CPC) of the Income-tax Department at Bangalore and a refund of only Rs.43,740 was issued. No intimation was given to the assessee as to why the balance amount of Rs.1.88,630 was not refundable. The assessee filed an application u/s 154 for rectification of the mistake and asked for refund of the balance amount. As there was no response from the department despite several reminders, the assessee filed a writ petition in the High Court. HELD by the High Court allowing the Petition:
(i) The difficulty faced by the tax payers relating to credit of TDS was considered by the Delhi High Court in Court On its Own Motion vs. CIT 352 ITR 273 and the CBDT was directed to issue directions with regard to giving credit of unmatched and mismatched TDS certificates. Pursuant thereto, the CBDT issued Instruction No.5 of 2013 dated 8.7.2013 directing that where the assessee approaches the AO with requisite details and particulars in the form of TDS certificate as evidence against any mismatch amount the AO would verify whether or not the deductor had made payment of the TDS in the government account and, in the event, the payment had been made, credit of the same would be given to the assessee.
(ii) On facts, no effort has been made by the AO to verify whether the deductor had made the payment of the TDS in the government account. On the other hand, the Income-tax department has shown helplessness in not refunding the amount on the sole ground that the details of the TDS did not match with the details shown in Form 26AS. There is a presumption that the deductor has deposited TDS amount in the government account especially when the deductor is a government department. By denying the benefit of TDS to the Petitioner because of the fault of the deductor causes not only harassment and inconvenience, but also makes the assessee feel cheated. There is no fault on the part of the Petitioner. The fault, if any, lay with the deductor. The mismatching is not attributable to the assessee. The department must refund the amount within 3 weeks with interest. The department must also pay costs of Rs. 25,000 to the Petitioner.
CBDT released ITR FORM ITR-3, ITR-4, ITR-5, ITR-6, ITR-7 for A.Y. 2014-15.
Notification No. 28/2014, Dt 30.05.2014
http://law.incometaxindia.gov.in/DIT/Notifications.aspx
Union Cabinet nods to constitution of SIT on black monies stashed abroad
May 28, 2014
CONSTITUTION OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATING TEAM (SIT) TO IMPLEMENT DECISION OF SUPREME COURT ON LARGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY STASHED ABROAD
PRESS RELEASE, DATED 27-5-2014
The Union Cabinet today approved constitution of Special Investigating Team (SIT) to implement the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on large amounts of money stashed abroad by evading taxes or generated through unlawful activities.
The SIT will be headed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.B. Shah, former Judge of the Supreme Court as Chairman and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat, former Judge as Vice Chairman.
The Members of the High Level Committee will comprise:
| i. |
| Secretary, Department of Revenue |
| ii. |
| Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India, |
| iii. |
| Director (IB), |
| iv. |
| Director, Enforcement |
| v. |
| Director, CBI |
| vi. |
| Chairman, CBDT, |
| vii. |
| Director General, Narcotics Control Bureau |
| viii. |
| Director General, Revenue Intelligence |
| ix. |
| Director, Financial Intelligence Unit |
| x. |
| Director, Research and Analysis Wing and |
| xi. |
| Joint Secretary (FT&IR-1), CBDT |
The SIT has been charged with the responsibility and duties of investigation, initiation of proceedings and prosecution in cases of Hasan Ali and other matters involving unaccounted money. SIT shall have jurisdiction in the cases where investigations have already commenced or are pending or awaiting to be initiated or have been completed. SIT will prepare a comprehensive action plan including creation of necessary institutional structure that could enable the country to fight the battle against unaccounted money. The SIT should report to the court the status of work from time to time.
Revised TDS returns to be accepted without Original Provisional receipts wef 01.06.14
May 28
Circular No: NSDL/TIN/2014/024
Subject: Revised procedure for acceptance of e-TDS/TCS correction statements and upload of scanned documents to TIN Central System
Attention of all TIN Facilitation Centers (TIN-PCs) is invited to the procedure of acceptance of e-TDS/TCS correction statements and upload of scanned images as provided in chapter 6 and 7 of the TIN-PC Operating Manual (TOM).
As per approval from Income Tax Department, the procedure for acceptance of e-TDS/TCS correction statement stands revised. The same is intimated vide this circular. The revised procedure applicable with effect From June 1, 2014 is as per table below:
Sr. No. Documents to be accepted along with e- TDS/TCS correction statements – Existing procedure
1 Physical Form 27A Physical Form 27A
2 Statement Statistics Report (SSR)
3 Copy of Provisional Receipt of Original Statement
In view of the above, TIN-PCs are required to accept e-TDS/TCS correction statements from Deductors/Collectors with .FVU file and duly signed Form 27A (generated from the latest File Validation Utility). The copy of Original Provisional Receipt and Statement Statistic Report need not be accepted from Deductor/Collector.
The verification of control total screen has to be carried out on the basis of information present on Form 27A.
Further, the revised procedure for upload of scanned images of e-TDS/TCS correction Statements, is as per the following table wherein e-TDS/TCS statements are accepted on or after June 1, 2014.
Note: For e-TDS/TCS statements accepted upto May 31, 2014, the scanned images of Form 27A and Provisional Receipt needs to be scanned and uploaded as referred vide circular number NSDL/T1N/2011/009 dated May 6, 2011.
The version of TOM after the above said updates is 5.10. The version control sheet is attached as Anneyure A
In case of any clarifications, contact TIN Support Desk on 022-24994201.
For and on behalf of
NSDL e-Governance Infrastructure Limited
Bushan Maideo
Senior Vice President
Sharing of Asset Details from Wealth Tax Returns with PSBs - CBDT Instructions
IN a meeting on the performance of Public Sector Banks (PSBs) taken by Finance Minister on 5.3.2014, the PSBs raised concern that the details of assets as available in the Wealth Tax Returns of loan defaulters are not being shared by Income Tax Department with the Banks despite repeated requests.
Section 42B of the Wealth Tax Act 1957 states:
42B Disclosure of information respecting assessees:- Where a person makes an application to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in the prescribed form for any information relating to any assessee in respect of any assessment made under this Act, the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner may, if he is satisfied that it is in the public interest so to do, furnish or cause to be furnished the information asked for in respect of that assessment only and his decision in this behalf shall be final and shall not be called in question in any court of law.
CBDT observes in a letter to all the Principal Chief Commissioners that in view of the fact that every Return of Wealth filed by the assessee is subject to assessment under section 16 of the Wealth Tax Act, the information contained therein qualifies for being supplied u/s 42B of the Wealth Tax Act, provided the CCWT/CWT is satisfied that supply of such information to PSBs is in public interest.
CBDT in this context clarifies that information on assets of loan defaulters to enable recovery of loans by PSBs from such defaulters is in public interest.
CBDT further clarifies that such information may be provided in respect of the borrower/mortgager/guarantor of the loan only. At the time of supply of such information a confidentiality clause may be included specifying that such information be used only for the purpose of recovery of loan and will not be shared with any other person/agency. An undertaking to this effect shall be obtained from the Bank (to be signed by an officer not below the rank of the Manager of the Branch concerned) before furnishing the information.
At the same time CBDT wants to protect its own interests. The Board directs that in order to ensure that the tax dues of the Department against the defaulter (if any) are safeguarded, an undertaking be obtained from the PSB to obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the jurisdictional CIT of the loan defaulter before appropriation of the surplus amount recovered from sale of immovable/movable asset of the defaulter, information in respect of which is shared, after adjustment of its loan dues.
CBDT wants the Principal Chief Commissioners to bring these guidelines to the notice of the Chief Commissioners, DGs and Commissioners of their charges.
RBI CIRCULAR Regarding Prior approval of RBI in cases of acquisition/ transfer of control of NBFCs. The prior written permission of the Reserve Bank of India shall be required for – (i) any takeover or acquisition of control of an NBFC, whether by acquisition of shares or otherwise; (ii) any merger/amalgamation of an NBFC with another entity or any merger/amalgamation of an entity with an NBFC that would give the acquirer / another entity control of the NBFC; (iii) any merger/amalgamation of an NBFC with another entity or any merger/amalgamation of an entity with an NBFC which would result in acquisition/transfer of shareholding in excess of 10 percent of the paid up capital of the NBFC. (iv) Prior written approval of the Reserve Bank would also be required before approaching the Court or Tribunal under Section 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 or Section 230-233 of Companies Act, 2013 seeking order for mergers or amalgamations with other companies or NBFCs.
FYI - CAs cannot undertake assignment of audit & accounting work together for same entity
Announcement on prohibition to undertake the assignment of audit and accounting work together for the same entity. – (20-05-2014)
No. ICAI/ESB/2014/03
It has come to the knowledge of some members that certain entities , while inviting tenders for services of chartered accountants for the assignment of statutory audit , are mentioning accounting and book keeping related works in the scope of works required to done by the auditor.
Members are hereby advised not to undertake such assignment since it is violative of the provisions of ‘Code of Ethics’ and ‘Guidance Note on Independence of Auditors’ for auditor of an entity to do book keeping work of the entity. The said prohibition in the case of Companies is further also mentioned in Section 144 of the Companies Act, 2013.
CBDT has revised PAN Application form 49A and 49AA wef from 16.05.2014 vide its notification no. 26/2014 , Dated- 16-5-2014. Revised Form 49A and 49AA provides option to get printed Mothers Name on PAN card.
Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011
Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011 is an Act of the Parliament of India which provides a mechanism to investigate alleged corruption and misuse of power by public servants and also protect anyone who exposes alleged wrongdoing in government bodies, projects and offices. The wrongdoing might take the form of fraud, corruption or mismanagement. The Act will also ensure punishment for false or frivolous complaints.
The Act was approved by the Cabinet of India as part of a drive to eliminate corruption in the country';s bureaucracy and passed by the Lok Sabha on 27 December 2011.The Bill was passed by Rajya Sabha on 21 February 2014 and received the President';s assent on 9 May 2014.The Act has not come into force till now.
Intent
An Act to establish a mechanism to receive complaints relating to disclosure on any allegation of corruption or willful misuse of power or willful misuse of discretion against any public servant and to inquire or cause an inquiry into such disclosure and to provide adequate safeguards against victimization of the person making such complaint and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto.
Salient Features
High Court on Restaurant Service
HC dismisses writ, upholds constitutional validity of Sec 66E(i) of Finance Act declaring service portion in activity of supply of food and drinks as "declared services"; Article 366(29-A) of Indian Constitution does not indicate subsuming of service part in sale of food, it rather separates sale of food and drinks from service; Sec 65B(44) and Sec 66E(i) only charge service tax on service part and not on sale part, which indicate exclusion of sale element from service as interpreted by SC in Associated-Hotel and Northern Caterers cases; Rejects assessee's reliance on SC ruling in K Damodarsamy, calling it irrelevant for determining Parliament's power to levy service tax on service element in sale; However, HC shows reservation in the rule quantifying fixed sum towards service and its functioning in restaurant, vis-a-vis tax under VAT Act; 40% over which service tax is charged cannot be subject to VAT; Absent provision in VAT Act to bifurcate amount between sale and service, HC advises State Govt to frame rules / issue clarification in conformity with provisions under Finance Act to avoid double taxation on same amount; Also allows assessee to object to VAT levy on service portion of bill value before VAT Authorities : Chattisgarh HC
